Peak Oil may finally slow population growth

[Enough Already]

Cheap oil has enabled exponential population/economic growth over the
past century. It has fooled many into thinking everything is owed to
them. Cheap food transport made them think they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat that now can't be sustained.

I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes in and people come out.
Very close to the truth.

Could it be that high oil prices will force a global shift toward
frugality, causing a drop in birthrates among all classes?
Contraception is really the ultimate form of conservation. We don't
need more mindless consumers in this world. Most people only conserve
when money forces them out of their self-entitlement delusion.* They
are already slowing down on the road to save fuel.

Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Of course that doesn't sit well with "conservatives" who think living
with less equates to personal failure. They see talk of conservation
as a liberal control conspiracy. Don't try to show them evidence of
finitude. It's all about take, take, take and trying to upstage other
shallow people. With so much greed-indoctrination from culture and
media, someone should invent a way to make frugality seem selfish.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/

Nature gives you everything, yet owes you nothing.

* If a new cheap energy source is discovered (seems unlikely), people
would probably return to their tradition of mindless takings and
gluttony. So, here's to Peak Oil for now!

[Peter Franks]

...

I see that you still don't have a life yet...

[Whata Fool]

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential population/economic growth over the
past century. It has fooled many into thinking everything is owed to
them. Cheap food transport made them think they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes in and people come out.
Very close to the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force a global shift toward
frugality, causing a drop in birthrates among all classes?

Sure, love for sales will drop 20 percent.

[James]

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential population/economic growth over the
past century. It has fooled many into thinking everything is owed to
them. Cheap food transport made them think they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes in and people come out.
Very close to the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force a global shift toward
frugality, causing a drop in birthrates among all classes?
Contraception is really the ultimate form of conservation. We don't
need more mindless consumers in this world. Most people only conserve
when money forces them out of their self-entitlement delusion.* They
are already slowing down on the road to save fuel.
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.
Of course that doesn't sit well with "conservatives" who think living
with less equates to personal failure. They see talk of conservation
as a liberal control conspiracy. Don't try to show them evidence of
finitude. It's all about take, take, take and trying to upstage other
shallow people. With so much greed-indoctrination from culture and
media, someone should invent a way to make frugality seem selfish.
E.A.
http://enough_already.tripod.com/
Nature gives you everything, yet owes you nothing.
* If a new cheap energy source is discovered (seems unlikely), people
would probably return to their tradition of mindless takings and
gluttony. So, here's to Peak Oil for now!

Hmmm. Well, I dunno. He seems reasonably intelligent but
something........ I got it. He's full of shit. - George Carlin

[Jack May]

Post by Enough Already
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015

http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out-of-lineup-by-2015.html

The GM volt will be available to buy in late 2010. It is designed to easily
use other fuels besides gasoline.

Boeing is strongly supporting the development of replacement fuels for jets
using "green goo"

Almost every car company and any other company that needs to power a motor
is investing money to make the transition away from oil.

Limits are only for people with extremely limited brains that can not
understand how to transition to new fuel sources.

The main problems for oil producing countries will be how to keep from being
killed by angry mobs of their citizens that no longer have the money coming
in for them to afford thier present life style.

[george conklin]

Post by Jack May

Post by Enough Already
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015
http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out-of-lineup-by-2015.html
The GM volt will be available to buy in late 2010. It is designed to
easily use other fuels besides gasoline.
Boeing is strongly supporting the development of replacement fuels for
jets using "green goo"
Almost every car company and any other company that needs to power a motor
is investing money to make the transition away from oil.
Limits are only for people with extremely limited brains that can not
understand how to transition to new fuel sources.
The main problems for oil producing countries will be how to keep from
being killed by angry mobs of their citizens that no longer have the money
coming in for them to afford thier present life style.

Don't worry. Alternatives will cost so much that oil will always have a
good market.

[The Trucker]

Post by george conklin

Post by Jack May

Post by Enough Already
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015
http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out-of-lineup-by-2015.html
The GM volt will be available to buy in late 2010. It is designed to
easily use other fuels besides gasoline.
Boeing is strongly supporting the development of replacement fuels for
jets using "green goo"
Almost every car company and any other company that needs to power a motor
is investing money to make the transition away from oil.
Limits are only for people with extremely limited brains that can not
understand how to transition to new fuel sources.
The main problems for oil producing countries will be how to keep from
being killed by angry mobs of their citizens that no longer have the money
coming in for them to afford thier present life style.

Don't worry. Alternatives will cost so much that oil will always have a
good market.

That is incorrect. It is very incorrect when you actually include the
externalities. The military involvement alone, in the enforcement of oil
rights would place the pump price of oil at about $7.50 or $8.00 right
now. And this doesn't include the environmental problems cause by the
exhausts. Nuclear energy is the only way to preserve the current life
styles of the American middle class in the future. But on the road to
that future there are a lot of pit stops. Every one of them are less
expensive than the current price of petroleum based fuels if all the
externalities are included in the pump price. Natural gas is a viable
alternative only because we have a sufficient home based supply for the
near term if we ALSO use a lot more wind and solar and algae based
biofuels.

[george conklin]

Post by The Trucker

Post by george conklin

Post by Jack May

Post by Enough Already
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015
http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out-of-lineup-by-2015.html
The GM volt will be available to buy in late 2010. It is designed to
easily use other fuels besides gasoline.
Boeing is strongly supporting the development of replacement fuels for
jets using "green goo"
Almost every car company and any other company that needs to power a motor
is investing money to make the transition away from oil.
Limits are only for people with extremely limited brains that can not
understand how to transition to new fuel sources.
The main problems for oil producing countries will be how to keep from
being killed by angry mobs of their citizens that no longer have the money
coming in for them to afford thier present life style.

Don't worry. Alternatives will cost so much that oil will always have a
good market.

That is incorrect. It is very incorrect when you actually include the
externalities.

Externalities are anyting you don't like, no economic facts.

[The Trucker]

Post by george conklin

Post by The Trucker

Post by george conklin

Post by Jack May

Post by Enough Already
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015
http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out-of-lineup-by-2015.html
The GM volt will be available to buy in late 2010. It is designed to
easily use other fuels besides gasoline.
Boeing is strongly supporting the development of replacement fuels for
jets using "green goo"
Almost every car company and any other company that needs to power a motor
is investing money to make the transition away from oil.
Limits are only for people with extremely limited brains that can not
understand how to transition to new fuel sources.
The main problems for oil producing countries will be how to keep from
being killed by angry mobs of their citizens that no longer have the money
coming in for them to afford thier present life style.

Don't worry. Alternatives will cost so much that oil will always have a
good market.

That is incorrect. It is very incorrect when you actually include the
externalities.

Externalities are anyting you don't like, no economic facts.

That may well be true. But it depends on how the "you" is interpreted. I
don't seem to be the only person in the USA that is sick of imperialism
and sick of the government giving our natural resources and Iraq's natural
resources to the oil companies.

[Sgt.Sausage]

Post by The Trucker
Nuclear energy is the only way to preserve the current life
styles of the American middle class in the future.

That, too, is only temporary. Soon thereafter we will
be discussing "Peak Plutonium" or "Peak Uranium". Both
are in far more limited supply than oil. We'll (sooner
or later) have to move on to something else.

[RicodJour]

Post by Sgt.Sausage

Post by The Trucker
Nuclear energy is the only way to preserve the current life
styles of the American middle class in the future.

That, too, is only temporary. Soon thereafter we will
be discussing "Peak Plutonium" or "Peak Uranium". Both
are in far more limited supply than oil. We'll (sooner
or later) have to move on to something else.

This is where someone will chime in with cold fusion.

R

[Amy Blankenship]

Post by Sgt.Sausage

Post by The Trucker
Nuclear energy is the only way to preserve the current life
styles of the American middle class in the future.

That, too, is only temporary. Soon thereafter we will
be discussing "Peak Plutonium" or "Peak Uranium". Both
are in far more limited supply than oil. We'll (sooner
or later) have to move on to something else.

This is where someone will chime in with cold fusion.

------------------------------------------------
I don't care what anyone says, I still prefer classic ASP

[Whata Fool]

Post by Amy Blankenship
------------------------------------------------
I don't care what anyone says, I still prefer classic ASP

You like those 1/24th scale prototype cars?



Loading Image...

[RicodJour]

Post by Amy Blankenship
------------------------------------------------
I don't care what anyone says, I still prefer classic ASP

       You like those 1/24th scale prototype cars?
http://www.wakefield-jones.net/slotforum/proxy%20pictures%2007/Classi...

I have that exact slot car, with some modifications, in my old race
box somewhere. I also noticed that they've opened up a slot car
racing place a few towns over. Guess it's time to take the toys out
of the mothballs!

R

[The Trucker]

Post by Sgt.Sausage

Post by The Trucker
Nuclear energy is the only way to preserve the current life
styles of the American middle class in the future.

That, too, is only temporary. Soon thereafter we will
be discussing "Peak Plutonium" or "Peak Uranium". Both
are in far more limited supply than oil. We'll (sooner
or later) have to move on to something else.

Maybe you will be. But I will be quite cozily dead.

[Jack May]

Post by Sgt.Sausage

Post by The Trucker
Nuclear energy is the only way to preserve the current life
styles of the American middle class in the future.

That, too, is only temporary. Soon thereafter we will
be discussing "Peak Plutonium" or "Peak Uranium". Both
are in far more limited supply than oil. We'll (sooner
or later) have to move on to something else.

That is a lie that assumes no processing of the spent fuel rods with breeder
reactors. Breeder reactors, used by other countries, will increase the
life time of nuclear supplies to hundreds of years.

[Amy Blankenship]

Post by Jack May

Post by Enough Already
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015
http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out-of-lineup-by-2015.html
The GM volt will be available to buy in late 2010. It is designed to
easily use other fuels besides gasoline.
Boeing is strongly supporting the development of replacement fuels for
jets using "green goo"
Almost every car company and any other company that needs to power a motor
is investing money to make the transition away from oil.
Limits are only for people with extremely limited brains that can not
understand how to transition to new fuel sources.

I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we didn't
waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

[Jack May]

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we didn't
waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon the
health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited brains
that don't understand how the world works.

To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.

The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the SF
Bay area than the cost per road user. The increased congestion caused by
transit makes transit a large factor in increased gas usage.

[RicodJour]

Conservation never works.  You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving.   The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon the
health of the economy.   Conservations is for people with limited brains
that don't understand how the world works.

Well, out of a rather large selection of applicants, I'm happy to say
that your comment has won the Stupidest Comment on Usenet award!
Congratulations.

You see only what you want to see. There's nothing wrong with that if
it's a conscious decision and you're not trying to foist your ideas
onto others, but you just have the blinders on.

BTW, how heavily invested are you in oil/gas related industries? Do
you now, or have you ever, worked for one? Have you ever been hunting
with Dick Cheney? Are you a paid shill for Big Oil or a volunteer?

R

[Jack May]

Post by RicodJour
Well, out of a rather large selection of applicants, I'm happy to say

that your comment has won the Stupidest Comment on Usenet award!
Congratulations.

Post by RicodJour
You see only what you want to see. There's nothing wrong with that if

it's a conscious decision and you're not trying to foist your ideas
onto others, but you just have the blinders on.

Post by RicodJour
BTW, how heavily invested are you in oil/gas related industries? Do

you now, or have you ever, worked for one? Have you ever been hunting
with Dick Cheney? Are you a paid shill for Big Oil or a volunteer?


Tell us were call for conservation to greatly extend the supply of anything
have worked. There are no examples but there is a very large supply of
people that are not capable of learning from past experience.

[Bill Ward]

Post by Jack May

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we didn't
waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon
the health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited
brains that don't understand how the world works.

Of course conservation works. If I can somehow bamboozle, frighten or
shame you into using less energy, there will be less demand and prices
will stay lower. Then I can afford more for myself. ;-)

Post by Jack May
To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.
The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the
SF Bay area than the cost per road user.

But few notice, because it's only taxpayer money that's wasted.

Post by Jack May
The increased congestion caused by transit makes transit a large factor
in increased gas usage.

That congestion has been a deliberate transportation strategy, to force
people out of their cars into transit. If you fix the roads, they'll stay
in their cars, thinking they somehow have the right to go wherever they
want, whenever they want, and however they want, just because they can
afford it.

Trying to force cutbacks in fuel use is like forcing starving people to go
on a diet. People should feel free to use as much fuel as they can
afford. The market works. Just don't complain about high prices when it
does.

[Amy Blankenship]

Post by Jack May

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we didn't
waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon
the health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited
brains that don't understand how the world works.

Never? That's a big statement ;-)

Post by Jack May
To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.

You are right... pointing it out does make every rational person's opinion
of your mental capacity worse.

Post by Jack May
The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the
SF Bay area than the cost per road user. The increased congestion caused
by transit makes transit a large factor in increased gas usage.

I think you forgot to include the cost of all the privately owned vehicles
that make roads feasible. That is an additional tax on road users.

I suspect that if all the people currently using transit went to using one
car per person like everyone else, you'd discover that the congestion you
see now is like nothing.

[george conklin]

Post by Amy Blankenship

Post by Jack May

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we didn't
waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon
the health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited
brains that don't understand how the world works.

Never? That's a big statement ;-)

Post by Jack May
To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.

You are right... pointing it out does make every rational person's
opinion of your mental capacity worse.

Post by Jack May
The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the
SF Bay area than the cost per road user. The increased congestion caused
by transit makes transit a large factor in increased gas usage.

I think you forgot to include the cost of all the privately owned vehicles
that make roads feasible. That is an additional tax on road users.
I suspect that if all the people currently using transit went to using one
car per person like everyone else, you'd discover that the congestion you
see now is like nothing.

The reason why we have 1 person per car is that it pleases 1. the car
manufacturers, and 2. city governments, which are fearful of what would
happen to their tax-supported transit systems if people were allowed to pick
up someone else in their car for any price the agreed upon. Therefore,
cities sponsor bound-to-fail car pooling make-believe schemes, out of fear
that we as drivers will in fact pick up someone in our cars.

[Amy Blankenship]

Post by george conklin

Post by Amy Blankenship

Post by Jack May

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we
didn't waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon
the health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited
brains that don't understand how the world works.

Never? That's a big statement ;-)

Post by Jack May
To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.

You are right... pointing it out does make every rational person's
opinion of your mental capacity worse.

Post by Jack May
The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the
SF Bay area than the cost per road user. The increased congestion
caused by transit makes transit a large factor in increased gas usage.

I think you forgot to include the cost of all the privately owned
vehicles that make roads feasible. That is an additional tax on road
users.
I suspect that if all the people currently using transit went to using
one car per person like everyone else, you'd discover that the congestion
you see now is like nothing.

The reason why we have 1 person per car is that it pleases 1. the car
manufacturers, and 2. city governments, which are fearful of what would
happen to their tax-supported transit systems if people were allowed to
pick up someone else in their car for any price the agreed upon.
Therefore, cities sponsor bound-to-fail car pooling make-believe schemes,
out of fear that we as drivers will in fact pick up someone in our cars.

Does your wife know this is what you do? 0-:-D

[Jack May]

Post by Amy Blankenship
Never? That's a big statement ;-)

OK you tell us about the run away success of conservation. There are none.

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think you forgot to include the cost of all the privately owned vehicles
that make roads feasible. That is an additional tax on road users.

People have to pay for the extremely expensive transit vehicles also.
People that have cars also make a lot more money. Poor people make about
45% more when they get a car expense voucher rather than using extremely
expensive transit.

Their income increase comes for their increased mobility to find better jobs
and to travel to those jobs. The cars for most people more than pay for
themselves. Another reason why people can not afford transit and don't use
it.

Post by Amy Blankenship
I suspect that if all the people currently using transit went to using one
car per person like everyone else, you'd discover that the congestion you
see now is like nothing.

The 25 times more cost per person to use transit would then be available to
increase capacity both with removing bottle necks and implementing the
electronics to increase road capacity. The congestion would go away or way
down.

[george conklin]

Post by Jack May

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we didn't
waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon
the health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited
brains that don't understand how the world works.
To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.
The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the
SF Bay area than the cost per road user. The increased congestion caused
by transit makes transit a large factor in increased gas usage.

The problem with conservation in the USA is that other countries,
starting with India and China, will simply consume anything we "save" in
about one second.

[Amy Blankenship]

Post by george conklin

Post by Jack May

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we didn't
waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon
the health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited
brains that don't understand how the world works.
To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.
The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the
SF Bay area than the cost per road user. The increased congestion caused
by transit makes transit a large factor in increased gas usage.

The problem with conservation in the USA is that other countries,
starting with India and China, will simply consume anything we "save" in
about one second.

Sure, because their per capita consumption is so much lower than ours...if
they come remotely close to our usage, no one will be able to breathe
because there will be no oxygen left. For this to work, we _all_ need to
work toward lowering our consumption.

[george conklin]

Post by Amy Blankenship

Post by george conklin

Post by Jack May

Post by Amy Blankenship
I think the limited brains are the ones that can't see that if we
didn't waste so much, we wouldn't need so much oil anyway.

Conservation never works. You get a lot of talk and very few people
actually conserving. The amount of oil used is heavily dependent upon
the health of the economy. Conservations is for people with limited
brains that don't understand how the world works.
To make it worse, as I have pointed out many time transit and roads are
coupled together by budget limits.
The high cost of transit leads to degradation of roads and increased
congestion. Transit takes about 25 times more money per passenger in the
SF Bay area than the cost per road user. The increased congestion
caused by transit makes transit a large factor in increased gas usage.

The problem with conservation in the USA is that other countries,
starting with India and China, will simply consume anything we "save" in
about one second.

Sure, because their per capita consumption is so much lower than ours...if
they come remotely close to our usage, no one will be able to breathe
because there will be no oxygen left. For this to work, we _all_ need to
work toward lowering our consumption.

Oil will run out, just a tad more slowly.

[RicodJour]

Post by Jack May

Post by Enough Already
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.

Mercedes to cut petroleum out of lineup by 2015
http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out...
The GM volt will be available to buy in late 2010.  It is designed to easily
use other fuels besides gasoline.
Boeing is strongly supporting the development of replacement fuels for jets
using "green goo"
Almost every car company and any other company that needs to power a motor
is investing money to make the transition away from oil.
Limits are only for people with extremely limited brains that can not
understand how to transition to new fuel sources.
The main problems for oil producing countries will be how to keep from being
killed by angry mobs of their citizens that no longer have the money coming
in for them to afford thier present life style.

Most of the more forward thinking oil countries have already invested
in so many other industries and in other countries that their
portfolios are suitably diversified. Iran and some others are another
story.

R

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food transport
made them think they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution was more
about oil than chlorophyll, and it caused
economic bloat that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes
in and people come out. Very close to the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force a
global shift toward frugality, causing a drop in
birthrates among all classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope and the
Mullahs are telling their followers to keep
pumping out the kids and that god will take care
of them. They could care less about the
resources, financial and economic that are
required to support a population.

Post by Enough Already
Contraception is
really the ultimate form of conservation. We
don't need more mindless consumers in this
world. Most people only conserve when money
forces them out of their self-entitlement
delusion.* They are already slowing down on the
road to save fuel.
Rising costs could force people to finally
respect limits. They've been ignoring the
ecological need for it.
Of course that doesn't sit well with
"conservatives" who think living with less
equates to personal failure. They see talk of
conservation as a liberal control conspiracy.
Don't try to show them evidence of finitude.
It's all about take, take, take and trying to
upstage other shallow people. With so much
greed-indoctrination from culture and media,
someone should invent a way to make frugality
seem selfish.
E.A.
http://enough_already.tripod.com/
Nature gives you everything, yet owes you
nothing.
* If a new cheap energy source is discovered
(seems unlikely), people would probably return
to their tradition of mindless takings and
gluttony. So, here's to Peak Oil for now!

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food transport
made them think they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution was more
about oil than chlorophyll, and it caused
economic bloat that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes
in and people come out. Very close to the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force a
global shift toward frugality, causing a drop in
birthrates among all classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that the TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it takes 2.2 to no-growth).

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food
transport made them think they could ignore
local carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution
was more about oil than chlorophyll, and it
caused economic bloat that now can't be
sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes
in and people come out. Very close to the
truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force a
global shift toward frugality, causing a drop
in birthrates among all classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance which
can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that the
TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it takes
2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't think
that Europeans take their religion as seriously
as other parts of the world. I would venture to
guess, that in fact, there are probably more "Non
Belivers" there than in the rest of the world.
Visit Mexico and Latin America sometime and tell
me what you observe. In the United States, the
birth rate for those of European descent is
actually declining even though the US population
is exploding. The reason is "Immigration" or to
be more precise and accurate ILLEGAL immigration
from south of our border. "Anchor Babies" are in
vogue.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food
transport made them think they could ignore
local carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution
was more about oil than chlorophyll, and it
caused economic bloat that now can't be
sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes
in and people come out. Very close to the
truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force a
global shift toward frugality, causing a drop
in birthrates among all classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance which
can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that the
TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it takes
2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't think
that Europeans take their religion as seriously
as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food
transport made them think they could ignore
local carrying-capacity. The Green
Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat
that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil
goes in and people come out. Very close to
the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force
a global shift toward frugality, causing a
drop in birthrates among all classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance
which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that the
TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it takes
2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't
think that Europeans take their religion as
seriously as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and
psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food
transport made them think they could ignore
local carrying-capacity. The Green
Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat
that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil
goes in and people come out. Very close to
the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force
a global shift toward frugality, causing a
drop in birthrates among all classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance
which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that the
TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it takes
2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't
think that Europeans take their religion as
seriously as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and
psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html

Irrelevant post.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food
transport made them think they could
ignore local carrying-capacity. The Green
Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat
that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil
goes in and people come out. Very close to
the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will
force a global shift toward frugality,
causing a drop in birthrates among all
classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance
which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that
the TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it
takes 2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't
think that Europeans take their religion as
seriously as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and
psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html

Irrelevant post.

Hardly Irrelevant. The thread is dealing with oil
and population growth. Read it and weep.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food
transport made them think they could
ignore local carrying-capacity. The Green
Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat
that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil
goes in and people come out. Very close to
the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will
force a global shift toward frugality,
causing a drop in birthrates among all
classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance
which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that
the TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it
takes 2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't
think that Europeans take their religion as
seriously as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and
psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html

Irrelevant post.

Hardly Irrelevant. The thread is dealing with oil
and population growth. Read it and weep.

There is NO correlation between oil and population growth, except to the
point that underdeveloped countries have a higher rate of population growth
than developed nations.

As for the population growth issues, see the following link to the US
Census:

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&submit=Submit+Query

This link is for the USA.

To see how populations SHRINK, look at the link for Spain:

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&submit=Submit+Query

What immigrants are doing is filling in the shrinkage which would have
happened if we were not importing our babies, just like we are importing our
TVs, Radios and computers. We don't produce either.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into
thinking everything is owed to them.
Cheap food transport made them think
they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution
was more about oil than chlorophyll, and
it caused economic bloat that now can't
be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where
oil goes in and people come out. Very
close to the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will
force a global shift toward frugality,
causing a drop in birthrates among all
classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance
which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that
the TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it
takes 2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't
think that Europeans take their religion as
seriously as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and
psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html

Irrelevant post.

Hardly Irrelevant. The thread is dealing with
oil
and population growth. Read it and weep.

There is NO correlation between oil and
population growth, except to the point that
underdeveloped countries have a higher rate of
population growth than developed nations.
As for the population growth issues, see the

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&submit=Submit+Query

Post by george conklin
This link is for the USA.
To see how populations SHRINK, look at the link

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&submit=Submit+Query

Post by george conklin
What immigrants are doing is filling in the
shrinkage which would have happened if we were
not importing our babies, just like we are
importing our
TVs, Radios and computers. We don't produce
either.

At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

[RicodJour]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw materials. Every group of
immigrants into the US, and into pretty much any other country, came
to escape poverty, disease, and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name like Lehmann I'd assume
that you are not a native american and are yourself an offshoot of an
immigrant population that was not entirely welcomed with open arms
into this country.

You are presenting a classical NIMBY attitude. You got yours, now you
want to shut the door. If you're interested in obtaining a "better
class" of immigrant, I suppose we could offer only Swiss and German
engineers jobs. I'm not sure if they'd take them as they'd have to
take a cut in pay and would get much worse benefits.

Immigration and emigration are responses to gradients of opportunity,
income, benefits, public perception, etc.. If those gradients are
applied to the direction of immigration flow between particular
countries, there will be no surprise as to what part of their
populations are moving where and why.

If you want to make your country more attractive to a different
segment of the population, maybe those from countries you approve of,
you have to start with making this country more attractive to them.
We're not doing that.

R

[Amy Blankenship]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw materials. Every group of
immigrants into the US, and into pretty much any other country, came
to escape poverty, disease, and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name like Lehmann I'd assume
that you are not a native american and are yourself an offshoot of an
immigrant population that was not entirely welcomed with open arms
into this country.

You are presenting a classical NIMBY attitude. You got yours, now you
want to shut the door. If you're interested in obtaining a "better
class" of immigrant, I suppose we could offer only Swiss and German
engineers jobs. I'm not sure if they'd take them as they'd have to
take a cut in pay and would get much worse benefits.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

When I was dating my husband, who was in England at the time, we absolutely
could not get him in the country under any kind of visa that would allow us
to keep dating while both in the U.S. (i.e. we finally had to go with a
fiancee visa just to get him here!). He is one of the top known names in
our field, and the normal visa channels made it so that if he hadn't had a
fiancee here, he could not have come here legally at all (but he wouldn't
have had a pressing desire to do so).

What people don't understand who haven't been through the process is that
your chances to get here under a legal visa are slim, and the process is
difficult to navigate even if you are a native English speaker. And that
doesn't even begin to take into account the thousands of dollars in fees
that you have to pay out while you're working through the process and the
fact that you have to have transportation and time to run around to all
sorts of different places. We've probably spent at least $5000, and we're
halfway through.

I am _way_ more sympathetic to illegal immigrants now that I've seen first
hand what it takes to be a legal immigrant.

[george conklin]

Post by RicodJour

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw materials. Every group of
immigrants into the US, and into pretty much any other country, came
to escape poverty, disease, and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name like Lehmann I'd assume
that you are not a native american and are yourself an offshoot of an
immigrant population that was not entirely welcomed with open arms
into this country.
You are presenting a classical NIMBY attitude. You got yours, now you
want to shut the door. If you're interested in obtaining a "better
class" of immigrant, I suppose we could offer only Swiss and German
engineers jobs. I'm not sure if they'd take them as they'd have to
take a cut in pay and would get much worse benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I was dating my husband, who was in England at the time, we
absolutely could not get him in the country under any kind of visa that
would allow us to keep dating while both in the U.S. (i.e. we finally had
to go with a fiancee visa just to get him here!). He is one of the top
known names in our field, and the normal visa channels made it so that if
he hadn't had a fiancee here, he could not have come here legally at all
(but he wouldn't have had a pressing desire to do so).
What people don't understand who haven't been through the process is that
your chances to get here under a legal visa are slim, and the process is
difficult to navigate even if you are a native English speaker. And that
doesn't even begin to take into account the thousands of dollars in fees
that you have to pay out while you're working through the process and the
fact that you have to have transportation and time to run around to all
sorts of different places. We've probably spent at least $5000, and we're
halfway through.
I am _way_ more sympathetic to illegal immigrants now that I've seen first
hand what it takes to be a legal immigrant.

I continue to be impressed at how hard these "imported" farm workes work
from sunup to sunset, and how needed they are by our economy. Such workers
are not pushed here. They are the type who could get work at home. They
are drawn here by our needs, not their needs.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw materials. Every group of
immigrants into the US, and into pretty much any other country, came
to escape poverty, disease, and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name like Lehmann I'd assume
that you are not a native american and are yourself an offshoot of an
immigrant population that was not entirely welcomed with open arms
into this country.

----

The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

[Dersu Uzala]

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

[george conklin]

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

Nonsense. These are producers. YOU are consumer.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I
write) are attracted here because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a
whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called
cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

Nonsense. These are producers. YOU are
consumer.

Fine, pay all of them at LEAST $20 an hour. Let
them join labor unions, REQUIRE the employer to
provide health insurance and a pension then we
can talk. Time you read about Caesar Chivaz and
why he opposed illegals.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I
write) are attracted here because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a
whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called
cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

Nonsense. These are producers. YOU are
consumer.

Fine, pay all of them at LEAST $20 an hour.

Many native-born Americans don't earn that much, yet lead happy,
productive lives. The men I speak of are producers. Too bad you are simpy
a consumer of what they produce.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I
write) are attracted here because we NEED
them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as
a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called
cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

Nonsense. These are producers. YOU are
consumer.

Fine, pay all of them at LEAST $20 an hour.

Many native-born Americans don't earn that
much, yet lead happy,
productive lives. The men I speak of are
producers. Too bad you are simpy a consumer of
what they produce.

Provide me with data showing how they exist on
less than $20 an hour - happy or not happy.
Please address all the costs of living that I
mentioned previously but you refuse to answer.
Show me a budget.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I
write) are attracted here because we NEED
them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as
a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called
cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

Nonsense. These are producers. YOU are
consumer.

Fine, pay all of them at LEAST $20 an hour.

Many native-born Americans don't earn that
much, yet lead happy,
productive lives. The men I speak of are
producers. Too bad you are simpy a consumer of
what they produce.

Provide me with data showing how they exist on
less than $20 an hour - happy or not happy.

For a far rightwing person, you don't know the standard rants. A family
of 4 when both parents are working full-time at minimum wage will exceed
the offical poverty level. The men who migrate and sleep 4-5 per motel room
and send the savings home to their families are in fact saving for the
future. Have you not noticed that it is common for Hispanic men to travel 5
per car? Contractors note that this is the one disadvantage....if the
driver is sick, everyone stays home.

[Dersu Uzala]

In article <***@earthlink.com>, ***@nospam.com
says...

Post by george conklin

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

Nonsense. These are producers. YOU are consumer.

Idiotcy. Everyone is a consumer. Some are also producers. Doesn't everyone
drink water, eat food, occupy space, burn oil, etc.?

Please direct me to an example of unlimited growth that did not end in tears.

[george conklin]

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by george conklin

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

Nonsense. These are producers. YOU are consumer.

Idiotcy. Everyone is a consumer. Some are also producers. Doesn't everyone
drink water, eat food, occupy space, burn oil, etc.?
Please direct me to an example of unlimited growth that did not end in tears.

Growth is heavily limited in the USA. Unlimited? You are kidding.

[Whata Fool]

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody willing to work any more,
they all wear gym shoes and brag about their degree.

If the farmer were to offer pay high enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a head.

[george conklin]

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody willing to work any more,
they all wear gym shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a head.

The loafers don't have any skills. Xmas trees require highly-skilled
workers, plus people who can pick up 100 lbs easily.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I
write) are attracted here because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a
whole doesn't need more people that consume.
Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by
using more and more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant
workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody
willing to work any more, they all wear gym
shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high
enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a
head.

Nay, the farmers would merely automate like the
rest of industry instead of EXPLOITING the poor.

It is strange that when one is against illegals
one is called RACISTS but those who exploit human
beings are absolved of all crimes and guilt.

Why did Caesar Chivaz object to the non union
illegals.

Do a budget some time and see if YOU could live
off of $9.00 an hour. Include things such as
rent, utilities, auto, auto insurance, medical
insurance, retirement, food, clothing, taxes. Let
me see the numbers and your budget.

Now, on top of this INSURE and insist that the
workers are covered by workmans' comp insurance.
Make sure that ALL OSHA work regulations were
abided by and then we can talk some more.

I worked at a commercial vineyard after I retired.
I worked WITH the illegals. I worked for $10.00
an hour. I have a science degree and am a
retired professional. Don't tell me Americans
won't do the work. I know of other vineyards in
my area that hire high school kids during
critical times.

I saw personally how they (the illegals) were
working in the vineyard while pesticides were
being sprayed right next to them - pesticides
that had a REQUIREMENT of NOT being in the
vineyard for at least TWO days after spraying but
they were there at the very same time and only a
row away.

I saw how they were required to go inside the
fermentors (closed space containers) and clean
them with absolutely NO information given about
the hazards of the cleaning compounds or the
other associated risks. I went inside myself BUT
I knew how to protect myself and I was aware of
how to avoid the health risks.

Witness for yourself such things as lawn care
workers using two cycle gasoline weed eaters with
NO ear protection and NO means of filtering the
exhaust of the two cycle weed eaters that they
continually breath. These are just a couple of
thousands of examples of the crap that goes on
daily.

Don't give me your shit about them being needed
and higher wages can not be paid.

[Dersu Uzala]

In article <***@4ax.com>, ***@fool.ami
says...

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by george conklin
The farm workers I am looking at today (as I write) are attracted here
because we NEED them.

The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more people
that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody willing to work any more,
they all wear gym shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a head.

Really? Let's say the farmer pays $60 an hour. That means $1 a minute. Let's
say the picker is amazingly slow, and picks 2 heads a minute. That works out
to 50 cents a head labor cost. Too bad you don't understand simple math. Let's
say lettuce did cost $20. If a head's non-labor cost is $5, then $15 would be
the labor cost. At 2 heads a minute, that means the picker is paid $30 a
minute, or $1800 an hour. I don't think wages that high would be needed.

[Whata Fool]

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more
people that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using more and
more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody willing to work any more,
they all wear gym shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a head.

Really? Let's say the farmer pays $60 an hour. That means $1 a minute. Let's
say the picker is amazingly slow, and picks 2 heads a minute. That works out
to 50 cents a head labor cost. Too bad you don't understand simple math. Let's
say lettuce did cost $20.

Lets say pigs can fly. I see a lot of this type of reasoning,
and it hurts the person that thinks it, because they are not willing to
work for the usual wages payed any place.

Post by Dersu Uzala
If a head's non-labor cost is $5, then $15 would be
the labor cost. At 2 heads a minute, that means the picker is paid $30 a
minute, or $1800 an hour. I don't think wages that high would be needed.

Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.

Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.

This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
In article

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a
whole doesn't need more people that consume.
Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills
by using more and more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant
workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody
willing to work any more, they all wear gym
shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high
enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars
a head.

Really? Let's say the farmer pays $60 an hour.
That means $1 a minute. Let's say the picker is
amazingly slow, and picks 2 heads a minute. That
works out to 50 cents a head labor cost. Too bad
you don't understand simple math. Let's say
lettuce did cost $20.

Lets say pigs can fly. I see a lot of
this type of reasoning,
and it hurts the person that thinks it, because
they are not willing to work for the usual wages
payed any place.

How do you define "usual wages"?
Does "Usual Wages" mean the lowest possible wages
that can be paid to anyone - legal or non legal.
Why was Caesar Chivaz so opposed to scab labor.
Was HE racists against his own people?

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
If a head's non-labor cost is $5, then $15 would
be the labor cost. At 2 heads a minute, that
means the picker is paid $30 a minute, or $1800
an hour. I don't think wages that high would be
needed.

Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer
who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has
been at least up until the last couple of
months).
And then possibly as many as half those
spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it
explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest
lasts a few weeks at most, and that is what
migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few
weeks
of work.

There ALREADY exists a system to allow immigrants
to come here LEGALLY and do seasonal work. Use
the system that already exists instead of
breaking the law.

Post by Whata Fool
The migrant may get about 5 cents a
head, the farmer may get 10 cents a head, and it
requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of
1500 to 3000 miles in refrigerated trucks,
unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less
than a dollar a head.

I would be willing to bet that if growers had to
pay a higher wage - a livable wage, they, or
someone else would figure out a way to mechanize
the harvesting.

[Dersu Uzala]

In article <***@4ax.com>, ***@fool.ami
says...

Post by Enough Already

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more
people that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using

mo

Post by Enough Already
re and

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody willing to work any more,
they all wear gym shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a head.

Really? Let's say the farmer pays $60 an hour. That means $1 a minute. Let's
say the picker is amazingly slow, and picks 2 heads a minute. That works out
to 50 cents a head labor cost. Too bad you don't understand simple math. Let's
say lettuce did cost $20.

Lets say pigs can fly. I see a lot of this type of reasoning,
and it hurts the person that thinks it, because they are not willing to
work for the usual wages payed any place.

Post by Dersu Uzala
If a head's non-labor cost is $5, then $15 would be
the labor cost. At 2 heads a minute, that means the picker is paid $30 a
minute, or $1800 an hour. I don't think wages that high would be needed.

Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

[Whata Fool]

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is not a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.

Why pick on produce farmers for hiring migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker cards.

Do you want a job on a produce farm, have you been displaced by
a migrant worker?

Most of the illegal immigrants do not want to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in the Rio Grande valley,
in Florida, or in California, and the work is not steady.

There are some greenhouses in other states like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the work is not steady.

And there is a huge manpower shortage in the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s and 1980s, and partly
because of alcohol, drugs and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously damaged the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages regardless of the economics of
the enterprise is flawed, as the worker has the option of working or
not working while the employer only has the option of hiring at a
given wage or go broke.

The idea that $9 an hour is not a reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business types, $9 an hour is a
huge burden on a small business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that would mean that the
only business that could survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses have less than $500
a day in sales.

With the new minimum wage of over $6 an hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

[george conklin]

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is not a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in the Rio Grande valley,
in Florida, or in California, and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the work is not steady.
And there is a huge manpower shortage in the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s and 1980s, and partly
because of alcohol, drugs and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously damaged the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages regardless of the economics of
the enterprise is flawed, as the worker has the option of working or
not working while the employer only has the option of hiring at a
given wage or go broke.
The idea that $9 an hour is not a reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business types, $9 an hour is a
huge burden on a small business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that would mean that the
only business that could survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses have less than $500
a day in sales.
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

$9 an hour is what farmers are paying "imported" workers. It is more
than they have to pay USA-style workers. The local farmer made that point
to me last week.

[Whata Fool]

Post by george conklin

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is not a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in the Rio Grande valley,
in Florida, or in California, and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the work is not steady.
And there is a huge manpower shortage in the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s and 1980s, and partly
because of alcohol, drugs and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously damaged the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages regardless of the economics of
the enterprise is flawed, as the worker has the option of working or
not working while the employer only has the option of hiring at a
given wage or go broke.
The idea that $9 an hour is not a reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business types, $9 an hour is a
huge burden on a small business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that would mean that the
only business that could survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses have less than $500
a day in sales.
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

$9 an hour is what farmers are paying "imported" workers. It is more
than they have to pay USA-style workers. The local farmer made that point
to me last week.

Did he also mention that when the produce is ready, he might
need 100 or more people for a couple of weeks, and the only way he
can get enough people to do the harvest in time is to have a standing
contract with visiting farm workers, else the crops will spoil?


Very few places only offer minimum wage, and many small
businesses don't even have to pay minimum wage, but to get help,
they have to pay at least $8 to $10 an hour.

I have trouble finding somebody of any age to do yard work
for $20 an hour, they want $30 just to mow for 20 minutes now,
everybody, even grade school students are "private contractors'.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by Whata Fool

Post by george conklin

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
In article

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the
dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it
has been at least up until the last couple of
months).
And then possibly as many as half those
spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it
explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest
lasts a few weeks at most, and that is what
migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a
few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents
a head, the farmer may get 10 cents a head,
and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of
1500 to 3000 miles in refrigerated trucks,
unload, store in refrigerated storage and
sell to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less
than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from
$9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers
would not be found at $18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is
not a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring
migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker
cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have
you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want
to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in
the Rio Grande valley, in Florida, or in
California, and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states
like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the
work is not steady.
And there is a huge manpower shortage in
the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s
and 1980s, and partly because of alcohol,
drugs and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously
damaged the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages
regardless of the economics of the enterprise
is flawed, as the worker has the option of
working or not working while the employer only
has the option of hiring at a given wage or go
broke.
The idea that $9 an hour is not a
reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business
types, $9 an hour is a huge burden on a small
business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that
would mean that the only business that could
survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses
have less than $500 a day in sales.
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an
hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

$9 an hour is what farmers are paying
"imported" workers. It is more
than they have to pay USA-style workers. The
local farmer made that point to me last week.

Did he also mention that when the produce
is ready, he might
need 100 or more people for a couple of weeks,
and the only way he can get enough people to do
the harvest in time is to have a standing
contract with visiting farm workers, else the
crops will spoil?

I grew up in the 50's in rural Illinois. Back
then farmers HELPED EACH OTHER. The same
could/should happen today. The fact is that a
lot of Americans have turned into greedy selfish
exploiting bastards.

Post by Whata Fool
Very few places only offer minimum wage,
and many small
businesses don't even have to pay minimum wage,
but to get help, they have to pay at least $8 to
$10 an hour.

If they had to pay more they would mechanize.
Ever consider why the African American slaves
were not near as important after the invention of
the cotton gin?

Post by Whata Fool
I have trouble finding somebody of any
age to do yard work
for $20 an hour, they want $30 just to mow for
20 minutes now, everybody, even grade school
students are "private contractors'.

Maybe it is not the salary you are offering but
your personality :-)

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Whata Fool

Post by george conklin

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
In article

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the
dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it
has been at least up until the last couple of
months).
And then possibly as many as half those
spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it
explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest
lasts a few weeks at most, and that is what
migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a
few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents
a head, the farmer may get 10 cents a head,
and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of
1500 to 3000 miles in refrigerated trucks,
unload, store in refrigerated storage and
sell to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less
than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from
$9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers
would not be found at $18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is
not a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring
migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker
cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have
you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want
to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in
the Rio Grande valley, in Florida, or in
California, and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states
like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the
work is not steady.
And there is a huge manpower shortage in
the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s
and 1980s, and partly because of alcohol,
drugs and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously
damaged the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages
regardless of the economics of the enterprise
is flawed, as the worker has the option of
working or not working while the employer only
has the option of hiring at a given wage or go
broke.
The idea that $9 an hour is not a
reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business
types, $9 an hour is a huge burden on a small
business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that
would mean that the only business that could
survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses
have less than $500 a day in sales.
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an
hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

$9 an hour is what farmers are paying
"imported" workers. It is more
than they have to pay USA-style workers. The
local farmer made that point to me last week.

Did he also mention that when the produce
is ready, he might
need 100 or more people for a couple of weeks,
and the only way he can get enough people to do
the harvest in time is to have a standing
contract with visiting farm workers, else the
crops will spoil?

I grew up in the 50's in rural Illinois. Back
then farmers HELPED EACH OTHER.

Well, when you are working 6 days a week on the farm, there is not time
to "help" your neighbor. The farmer-owners are all busy.

[Whata Fool]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Whata Fool

Post by george conklin

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
In article

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the
dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it
has been at least up until the last couple of
months).
And then possibly as many as half those
spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it
explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest
lasts a few weeks at most, and that is what
migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a
few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents
a head, the farmer may get 10 cents a head,
and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of
1500 to 3000 miles in refrigerated trucks,
unload, store in refrigerated storage and
sell to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less
than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from
$9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers
would not be found at $18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is
not a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring
migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker
cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have
you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want
to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in
the Rio Grande valley, in Florida, or in
California, and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states
like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the
work is not steady.
And there is a huge manpower shortage in
the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s
and 1980s, and partly because of alcohol,
drugs and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously
damaged the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages
regardless of the economics of the enterprise
is flawed, as the worker has the option of
working or not working while the employer only
has the option of hiring at a given wage or go
broke.
The idea that $9 an hour is not a
reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business
types, $9 an hour is a huge burden on a small
business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that
would mean that the only business that could
survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses
have less than $500 a day in sales.
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an
hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

$9 an hour is what farmers are paying
"imported" workers. It is more
than they have to pay USA-style workers. The
local farmer made that point to me last week.

Did he also mention that when the produce
is ready, he might
need 100 or more people for a couple of weeks,
and the only way he can get enough people to do
the harvest in time is to have a standing
contract with visiting farm workers, else the
crops will spoil?

I grew up in the 50's in rural Illinois. Back
then farmers HELPED EACH OTHER. The same
could/should happen today. The fact is that a
lot of Americans have turned into greedy selfish
exploiting bastards.

Post by Whata Fool
Very few places only offer minimum wage,
and many small
businesses don't even have to pay minimum wage,
but to get help, they have to pay at least $8 to
$10 an hour.

If they had to pay more they would mechanize.
Ever consider why the African American slaves
were not near as important after the invention of
the cotton gin?

Post by Whata Fool
I have trouble finding somebody of any
age to do yard work
for $20 an hour, they want $30 just to mow for
20 minutes now, everybody, even grade school
students are "private contractors'.

Maybe it is not the salary you are offering but
your personality :-)

Without a doubt. :-)

But a kid that wanted $10 to go to a carnival tonight
offered to cover the new water line trench for $10, and it
was too hot and humid for me to do it, I am lucky.


Darned Global Warming, I feel it today.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
In article

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer
who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has
been at least up until the last couple of
months).
And then possibly as many as half those
spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it
explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest
lasts a few weeks at most, and that is what
migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a
few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a
head, the farmer may get 10 cents a head, and
it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of
1500 to 3000 miles in refrigerated trucks,
unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less
than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour
to $18/hour, the price of a head skyrockets by 5
cents? And legal pickers would not be found at
$18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is not
a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring
migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker
cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have
you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want
to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in the
Rio Grande valley, in Florida, or in California,
and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states
like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the work
is not steady.

And that is why you will now see a lot of them on
construction sites and playing the role of union
busting. They are taking good paying jobs away
from union workers and lowering the pay scale.

Post by Whata Fool
And there is a huge manpower shortage in
the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s
and 1980s, and partly because of alcohol, drugs
and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously damaged
the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages regardless
of the economics of the enterprise is flawed, as
the worker has the option of working or not
working while the employer only has the option
of hiring at a given wage or go broke.
The idea that $9 an hour is not a
reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business
types, $9 an hour is a huge burden on a small
business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an hour
for a sales clerk or general labor, that would
mean that the only business that could survive
would need sales revenue of about $1000 a day
minimum, and many small businesses have less
than $500 a day in sales.
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an
hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

I think you should.

After I retired, I worked for a vineyard and
winery in Northern Virginia. I worked WITH the
illegals. I learned a lot about exploitation.
The illegals are fine people and hard workers.
Those who hire them are for the most part wealthy
assholes.

I think a LOT of people should sit down and figure
out a budget for say $10 an hour and see if they
can survive in the area in which they live. Take
into account ALL living expenses and just see the
minimum salary that is need just to survive.

[Earl Evleth]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
I think a LOT of people should sit down and figure
out a budget for say $10 an hour and see if they
can survive in the area in which they live. Take
into account ALL living expenses and just see the
minimum salary that is need just to survive.

I also think there is no general realization that
low and middle income wages have actually gone down
since the 1960s-1970s

In terms of 1982 (constant) dollars the average hourly income
peaked in about 1972 at around $9/hour and has
never reached that figured again. By 1992-96 they
had slipped to around $7.50 and hour and recovered
to a little over $8/hour, $8.24 exactly and that
is down from $8.35. The current dollar figure is
$18 but that figure is deceptive.

http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cesbtab4.htm

Likewise, minimum wages peaked in constant dollars
(1996 dollars) at $7.21 in 1968. At the current
$5.85 ($4.41 in 1996 dollars) the drop in
purchasing power is enormous. Few people
actually earn minimum wage but that rate
does influence wages just above $5.85 to
$10.00

Looking over income growth for all income levels,
only the top 5% of incomes have improved significantly
in the last 8 years.

[Whata Fool]

Post by Earl Evleth

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
I think a LOT of people should sit down and figure
out a budget for say $10 an hour and see if they
can survive in the area in which they live. Take
into account ALL living expenses and just see the
minimum salary that is need just to survive.

I also think there is no general realization that
low and middle income wages have actually gone down
since the 1960s-1970s
In terms of 1982 (constant) dollars the average hourly income
peaked in about 1972 at around $9/hour and has
never reached that figured again. By 1992-96 they
had slipped to around $7.50 and hour and recovered
to a little over $8/hour, $8.24 exactly and that
is down from $8.35. The current dollar figure is
$18 but that figure is deceptive.
http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cesbtab4.htm
Likewise, minimum wages peaked in constant dollars
(1996 dollars) at $7.21 in 1968. At the current
$5.85 ($4.41 in 1996 dollars) the drop in
purchasing power is enormous. Few people
actually earn minimum wage but that rate
does influence wages just above $5.85 to
$10.00
Looking over income growth for all income levels,
only the top 5% of incomes have improved significantly
in the last 8 years.

You shouldn't be posting stuff unless you have actually
researched it or know it, every state is different, and only
a few states have a minimum wage the same as the federal
minimum (blue states here);


http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm#Texas


, and in many, even that doesn't apply to companies
that employ less than 4 employees.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
In article

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer
who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has
been at least up until the last couple of
months).
And then possibly as many as half those
spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it
explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest
lasts a few weeks at most, and that is what
migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a
few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a
head, the farmer may get 10 cents a head, and
it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of
1500 to 3000 miles in refrigerated trucks,
unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less
than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour
to $18/hour, the price of a head skyrockets by 5
cents? And legal pickers would not be found at
$18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is not
a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring
migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker
cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have
you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want
to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in the
Rio Grande valley, in Florida, or in California,
and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states
like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the work
is not steady.

And that is why you will now see a lot of them on
construction sites and playing the role of union
busting. They are taking good paying jobs away
from union workers and lowering the pay scale.

Post by Whata Fool
And there is a huge manpower shortage in
the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s
and 1980s, and partly because of alcohol, drugs
and criminal records.
The liberal influence has seriously damaged
the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages regardless
of the economics of the enterprise is flawed, as
the worker has the option of working or not
working while the employer only has the option
of hiring at a given wage or go broke.
The idea that $9 an hour is not a
reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business
types, $9 an hour is a huge burden on a small
business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an hour
for a sales clerk or general labor, that would
mean that the only business that could survive
would need sales revenue of about $1000 a day
minimum, and many small businesses have less
than $500 a day in sales.
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an
hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

I think you should.
After I retired, I worked for a vineyard and
winery in Northern Virginia. I worked WITH the
illegals. I learned a lot about exploitation.
The illegals are fine people and hard workers.
Those who hire them are for the most part wealthy
assholes.
I think a LOT of people should sit down and figure
out a budget for say $10 an hour and see if they
can survive in the area in which they live. Take
into account ALL living expenses and just see the
minimum salary that is need just to survive.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
After I retired, I worked for a vineyard and
winery in Northern Virginia. I worked WITH the
illegals. I learned a lot about exploitation.
The illegals are fine people and hard workers.
Those who hire them are for the most part wealthy
assholes.

Landscapers I know work right along with the illegals. The farmer
across the way works right along with the men, right there.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
After I retired, I worked for a vineyard and
winery in Northern Virginia. I worked WITH the
illegals. I learned a lot about exploitation.
The illegals are fine people and hard workers.
Those who hire them are for the most part
wealthy assholes.

Landscapers I know work right along with
the illegals. The farmer
across the way works right along with the men,
right there.

Try it YOURSELF and report back.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
After I retired, I worked for a vineyard and
winery in Northern Virginia. I worked WITH the
illegals. I learned a lot about exploitation.
The illegals are fine people and hard workers.
Those who hire them are for the most part
wealthy assholes.

Landscapers I know work right along with
the illegals. The farmer
across the way works right along with the men,
right there.

Try it YOURSELF and report back.

I have for a day or two, and that is why I know how much they need more
hands to do farm work.

[The Trucker]

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool
Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

Not enough, but primarily because it is not a steady job,
$18 an hour is well above average US job pay.

The cost of labor is not passed on to the consumer. That is a lie. It
will be a lie every time it is repeated. Much of the cost of labor is
absorbed by land prices. A head of lettuce can be produced in Mexico or
in Brazil or in some other temperate location and the cost of getting it
to market is a real cost. The price of lettuce is set by the location
costs more than it is set by the cost of labor and that price is whatever
the market will bear. If it is cheaper to grow lettuce in Mexico and ship
it to the USA then that is what will happen and the price of farm land in
California will fall until equilibrium is restored. That new equilibrium
will be at a higher price for lettuce but it will __**NOT**__ be the total
increase in the price of labor. It will be much, much less. Whether
migrant workers make their home in Mexico or Arkansas is economically
irrelevant but for the cost of living at the "home location".

I am more than a little tired of neoclassical financial bean counters
posing as economists.

Post by Whata Fool
Why pick on produce farmers for hiring migrant workers, most of
which probably do have visiting farm worker cards.
Do you want a job on a produce farm, have you been displaced by
a migrant worker?
Most of the illegal immigrants do not want to work on a farm
either, most of the big produce farms are in the Rio Grande valley,
in Florida, or in California, and the work is not steady.
There are some greenhouses in other states like Ohio, but the
work is not steady, I'll say it again, the work is not steady.

Long haul truckers are also "migrants". Whether the work is "steady" or
not is totally beside the point.

Post by Whata Fool
And there is a huge manpower shortage in the US, partly because
of the birth rate demographics from the 1970s and 1980s, and partly
because of alcohol, drugs and criminal records.

There has never been, nor will there ever be, a shortage of labor. Such a
claim is aristocratic horseshit. You may as well claim that there is a
shortage of polio. Nobody __**WANTS**__ to labor. Only a Republican
fascist (a land owner for instance that will see the price of his land
take a big hit if wages are increased) can whine about a shortage of labor.

Post by Whata Fool
The liberal influence has seriously damaged the nation, the idea
that the worker deserves higher wages regardless of the economics of
the enterprise is flawed, as the worker has the option of working or
not working while the employer only has the option of hiring at a
given wage or go broke.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The
"employer" is the owner of the means of production, liar. And in this
case the means of production are an unearned and naturally occurring means
called __**LAND**__. For actual capital it is different in that _real_
capital such as land improvements and tractors and such must be
__**EARNED**__ and maintained. The neoclassical aggregation of natural
resource and capital is a fascist means to misrepresent land as capital.
By doing so the fascist can brand all attempts to raise wages as an
assault on "capitalism". It is nothing but fascist pig manure.

Post by Whata Fool
The idea that $9 an hour is not a reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business types, $9 an hour is a
huge burden on a small business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that would mean that the
only business that could survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses have less than $500
a day in sales.

Gee... Then why not do the labor yourself, Mr. Business? You make me
sick. Who the hell do you think you are to tell the rest of us what we
are worth?

Post by Whata Fool
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

Do it.

[george conklin]

Post by The Trucker
The cost of labor is not passed on to the consumer. That is a lie. It
will be a lie every time it is repeated. Much of the cost of labor is
absorbed by land prices. A head of lettuce can be produced in Mexico or
in Brazil or in some other temperate location and the cost of getting it
to market is a real cost. The price of lettuce is set by the location
costs more than it is set by the cost of labor and that price is whatever
the market will bear. If it is cheaper to grow lettuce in Mexico and ship
it to the USA then that is what will happen and the price of farm land in
California will fall until equilibrium is restored. That new equilibrium
will be at a higher price for lettuce but it will __**NOT**__ be the total
increase in the price of labor. It will be much, much less. Whether
migrant workers make their home in Mexico or Arkansas is economically
irrelevant but for the cost of living at the "home location".

No, good land just goes out of production and is abandoned. It goes back
to woods.

[Les Cargill]

Post by george conklin

Post by The Trucker
The cost of labor is not passed on to the consumer. That is a lie. It
will be a lie every time it is repeated. Much of the cost of labor is
absorbed by land prices. A head of lettuce can be produced in Mexico or
in Brazil or in some other temperate location and the cost of getting it
to market is a real cost. The price of lettuce is set by the location
costs more than it is set by the cost of labor and that price is whatever
the market will bear. If it is cheaper to grow lettuce in Mexico and ship
it to the USA then that is what will happen and the price of farm land in
California will fall until equilibrium is restored. That new equilibrium
will be at a higher price for lettuce but it will __**NOT**__ be the total
increase in the price of labor. It will be much, much less. Whether
migrant workers make their home in Mexico or Arkansas is economically
irrelevant but for the cost of living at the "home location".

No, good land just goes out of production and is abandoned. It goes back
to woods.

And it's doing so at a fairly brisk clip.

--
Les Cargill

[george conklin]

Post by Les Cargill

Post by george conklin

Post by The Trucker
The cost of labor is not passed on to the consumer. That is a lie. It
will be a lie every time it is repeated. Much of the cost of labor is
absorbed by land prices. A head of lettuce can be produced in Mexico or
in Brazil or in some other temperate location and the cost of getting it
to market is a real cost. The price of lettuce is set by the location
costs more than it is set by the cost of labor and that price is whatever
the market will bear. If it is cheaper to grow lettuce in Mexico and ship
it to the USA then that is what will happen and the price of farm land in
California will fall until equilibrium is restored. That new equilibrium
will be at a higher price for lettuce but it will __**NOT**__ be the total
increase in the price of labor. It will be much, much less. Whether
migrant workers make their home in Mexico or Arkansas is economically
irrelevant but for the cost of living at the "home location".

No, good land just goes out of production and is abandoned. It goes
back to woods.

And it's doing so at a fairly brisk clip.
--
Les Cargill

Pictures of the land my father owned, and those of the land I owned,
showed that about 100 years ago the land was clear for crops and grazing
cattle. Now my land is all trees, and nearly the entire mountainside my
father owned is all trees again. The area across from me is farmed as Xmas
trees, so it is still in production. But a real whole lot is not. My
cousin has 400 acres which was a dairy farm when I was very small, but now
is (useless) trees also. I used to take pictures of the pasture going back
into forest. Where I built a shack as a kid was all trees when I tried to
show my wife where I used to hang out.

[Whata Fool]

Post by The Trucker

Post by Whata Fool
The idea that $9 an hour is not a reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business types, $9 an hour is a
huge burden on a small business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that would mean that the
only business that could survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses have less than $500
a day in sales.

Gee... Then why not do the labor yourself, Mr. Business?

I am forced to, I even have to dig trenches to replace my
water line, because I can't get anybody to dig them, let alone
be able to pay them, and it is tough on a man in his 8oth year.

Post by The Trucker
You make me
sick. Who the hell do you think you are to tell the rest of us what we
are worth?

I know what you are worth, do you want to keep it a secret? :-)

Post by The Trucker

Post by Whata Fool
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

Do it.

I may not have a choice, my credit cards are about maxed out,
and I like to buy toys.

I don't care what people are worth, I know how much they
make, and it isn't $18 an hour on average.

Anybody with good credit and no criminal record that wants
to ruin their kidneys or paralyse their bladder holding it while
they drive professionally can probably lease or buy a vehicle and
earn well above average.

But those who want a day job close to home, doing casual or
unskilled or even semi-skilled labor, does good to earn over $12.

Those are the facts nation wide, except maybe for some areas
of DC, NY, Calif, etc.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by Whata Fool

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 04:57:11 -0400, Whata Fool

Post by Whata Fool
The idea that $9 an hour is not a
reasonable wage is also flawed,
in a normal work environment of most business
types, $9 an hour is a huge burden on a small
business, small retailers can NOT pay $9 an
hour for a sales clerk or general labor, that
would mean that the only business that could
survive would need sales revenue of about
$1000 a day minimum, and many small businesses
have less than $500 a day in sales.

Gee... Then why not do the labor yourself, Mr.
Business?

I am forced to, I even have to dig
trenches to replace my
water line, because I can't get anybody to dig
them, let alone be able to pay them, and it is
tough on a man in his 8oth year.

You make me
sick. Who the hell do you think you are to tell
the rest of us what we are worth?

I know what you are worth, do you want to
keep it a secret? :-)

Post by Whata Fool
With the new minimum wage of over $6 an
hour, I am tempted
to get a job. :-)

Do it.

I may not have a choice, my credit cards
are about maxed out,
and I like to buy toys.

And you are talking about economics of farm labor?
Maybe it would be a good idea to get your own
house in order :-)

Post by Whata Fool
I don't care what people are worth, I
know how much they
make, and it isn't $18 an hour on average.
Anybody with good credit and no criminal
record that wants
to ruin their kidneys or paralyse their bladder
holding it while they drive professionally can
probably lease or buy a vehicle and earn well
above average.
But those who want a day job close to
home, doing casual or
unskilled or even semi-skilled labor, does good
to earn over $12.

If you are indeed 80 years old, I realize that $12
an hour sounds like a high paying job - BUT - I
suggest you do a budget on what it cost to
SURVIVE today. Use current going rates for
expenses in your area and post them for daily,
monthly, and yearly expenditures and get back to
me. BTW - also include self employment taxes and
the cost for self insurance.

Post by Whata Fool
Those are the facts nation wide, except
maybe for some areas
of DC, NY, Calif, etc.

[george conklin]

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Enough Already

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more
people that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using

mo

Post by Enough Already
re and

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody willing to work any more,
they all wear gym shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a head.

Really? Let's say the farmer pays $60 an hour. That means $1 a minute. Let's
say the picker is amazingly slow, and picks 2 heads a minute. That works out
to 50 cents a head labor cost. Too bad you don't understand simple math.

Let's

Post by Enough Already

Post by Dersu Uzala
say lettuce did cost $20.

Lets say pigs can fly. I see a lot of this type of reasoning,
and it hurts the person that thinks it, because they are not willing to
work for the usual wages payed any place.

Post by Dersu Uzala
If a head's non-labor cost is $5, then $15 would be
the labor cost. At 2 heads a minute, that means the picker is paid $30 a
minute, or $1800 an hour. I don't think wages that high would be needed.

Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

Farm work attracts few with alterntives because it is very difficult and
you can make just as much money at McDonalds and it is air conditioned.

[The Trucker]

Post by george conklin

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Enough Already

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
The FARMER needs them. Maybe. The society as a whole doesn't need more
people that consume. Unlimited growth is called cancer, and kills by using

mo

Post by Enough Already
re and

Post by Dersu Uzala

Post by Whata Fool

Post by Dersu Uzala
more resources.

The people need the food, if the migrant workers didn't pick
it, it would rot in the field, there is nobody willing to work any more,
they all wear gym shoes and brag about their degree.
If the farmer were to offer pay high enough to get the loafers
to pick the crops, lettuce would be 20 dollars a head.

Really? Let's say the farmer pays $60 an hour. That means $1 a minute. Let's
say the picker is amazingly slow, and picks 2 heads a minute. That works out
to 50 cents a head labor cost. Too bad you don't understand simple math.

Let's

Post by Enough Already

Post by Dersu Uzala
say lettuce did cost $20.

Lets say pigs can fly. I see a lot of this type of reasoning,
and it hurts the person that thinks it, because they are not willing to
work for the usual wages payed any place.

Post by Dersu Uzala
If a head's non-labor cost is $5, then $15 would be
the labor cost. At 2 heads a minute, that means the picker is paid $30 a
minute, or $1800 an hour. I don't think wages that high would be needed.

Lets say lettuce wholesales to the dealer who sells to the public
for 30 cents a head (which is about what it has been at least up until
the last couple of months).
And then possibly as many as half those spoil before being sold.
Your math is so far from realistic, it explains why the problem
exists. In most places the lettuce harvest lasts a few weeks at most,
and that is what migrant farm workers do, fill the need for a few weeks
of work. The migrant may get about 5 cents a head, the farmer may
get 10 cents a head, and it requires good planning to warehouse in
refrigerated storage, transport an average of 1500 to 3000 miles in
refrigerated trucks, unload, store in refrigerated storage and sell
to the dealer or distributor.
This is why lettuce usually costs less than a dollar a head.

So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

Farm work attracts few with alterntives because it is very difficult and
you can make just as much money at McDonalds and it is air conditioned.

And since it is very difficult and uncomfortable it should pay a lot more
than working at McDonalds and the lettuce and tomatoes on that Big Mac
should probably cost a little more.

If American farm labor was paid $15 an hour then the Mexicans would grow
lettuce and ship it to the USA. And the California land owners would lose
their Republican butts.

[george conklin]

Post by The Trucker

Post by george conklin
Farm work attracts few with alterntives because it is very difficult and
you can make just as much money at McDonalds and it is air conditioned.

And since it is very difficult and uncomfortable it should pay a lot more
than working at McDonalds and the lettuce and tomatoes on that Big Mac
should probably cost a little more.

This is the old Marxist approach. Since the janitor's job is less nice
than the boss' work, then the janitor should be paid more than the boss of
the operation.

[Les Cargill]

Post by george conklin

Post by The Trucker

Post by george conklin
Farm work attracts few with alterntives because it is very difficult and
you can make just as much money at McDonalds and it is air conditioned.

And since it is very difficult and uncomfortable it should pay a lot more
than working at McDonalds and the lettuce and tomatoes on that Big Mac
should probably cost a little more.

This is the old Marxist approach. Since the janitor's job is less nice
than the boss' work, then the janitor should be paid more than the boss of
the operation.

"Less nice" how, exactly?

--
Les Cargill

[george conklin]

Post by Les Cargill

Post by george conklin

Post by The Trucker

Post by george conklin
Farm work attracts few with alterntives because it is very difficult and
you can make just as much money at McDonalds and it is air conditioned.

And since it is very difficult and uncomfortable it should pay a lot more
than working at McDonalds and the lettuce and tomatoes on that Big Mac
should probably cost a little more.

This is the old Marxist approach. Since the janitor's job is less
nice than the boss' work, then the janitor should be paid more than the
boss of the operation.

"Less nice" how, exactly?

Well, if you have to be out in the weather when it is hot, and when it
is very cold, and you have to work with lifting a lot of things, then you
will literally wear out sooner than if you are in an office. They can tell
who did strong physical work when they dig up on graveyards by the damage to
the human spine, for example. So, less nice would be difficult outside
jobs, for example, while working in an air conditioned office would be a
nice job in comparison.

[Les Cargill]

<snip>

Post by The Trucker
If American farm labor was paid $15 an hour then the Mexicans would grow
lettuce and ship it to the USA. And the California land owners would lose
their Republican butts.

Jimmy Carter tried to make the Central Valley farmers pay for the water
they use. As a result, Ronald Reagan became President.They're
politically powerful.

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill]

Post by Dersu Uzala
says...

<snip>

Post by Dersu Uzala
So if the picker's wage is doubled, from $9/hour to $18/hour, the price of a
head skyrockets by 5 cents? And legal pickers would not be found at $18/hour?

It's entirely possible that legal pickers can't be found at any price.
Depends on where you are.

Murikans can't do manual labor at all.

--
Les Cargill

[Paul E. Lehmann]

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished
product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into the
US, and into pretty much any other country, came
to escape poverty, disease, and obtain education
and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name like
Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a native
american and are yourself an offshoot of an
immigrant population that was not entirely
welcomed with open arms into this country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

The United states offers more LEGAL immigration
than any other country in the world and that is
fine with me. It is the ILLEGALS that presents
problems.

You are presenting a classical NIMBY attitude.
You got yours, now you
want to shut the door. If you're interested in
obtaining a "better class" of immigrant, I
suppose we could offer only Swiss and German
engineers jobs. I'm not sure if they'd take
them as they'd have to take a cut in pay and
would get much worse benefits.

How about if we had the immigration policy and
laws of Mexico.

Immigration and emigration are responses to
gradients of opportunity,
income, benefits, public perception, etc.. If
those gradients are applied to the direction of
immigration flow between particular countries,
there will be no surprise as to what part of
their populations are moving where and why.
If you want to make your country more attractive
to a different segment of the population, maybe
those from countries you approve of, you have to
start with making this country more attractive
to them. We're not doing that.
R

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished
product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into the
US, and into pretty much any other country, came
to escape poverty, disease, and obtain education
and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name like
Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a native
american and are yourself an offshoot of an
immigrant population that was not entirely
welcomed with open arms into this country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family came here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our
south of the border "immigrants" those who
are less likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished
product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into the
US, and into pretty much any other country,
came to escape poverty, disease, and obtain
education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name
like Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a
native american and are yourself an offshoot
of an immigrant population that was not
entirely welcomed with open arms into this
country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family came
here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I am third generation - not exactly the 1630 era.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our
south of the border "immigrants" those who
are less likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished
product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into the
US, and into pretty much any other country,
came to escape poverty, disease, and obtain
education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name
like Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a
native american and are yourself an offshoot
of an immigrant population that was not
entirely welcomed with open arms into this
country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family came
here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I am third generation - not exactly the 1630 era.

Got you beat by several hundred years there. Stop thinking that newer
immigrants are inferior to you.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our
south of the border "immigrants" those who
are less likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The
finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into
the US, and into pretty much any other
country, came to escape poverty, disease,
and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name
like Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a
native american and are yourself an offshoot
of an immigrant population that was not
entirely welcomed with open arms into this
country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family came
here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I am third generation - not exactly the 1630
era.

Got you beat by several hundred years there.
Stop thinking that newer
immigrants are inferior to you.

IMMIGRANTS are fine. ILLEGAL immigrants are NOT.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our
south of the border "immigrants" those who
are less likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The
finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into
the US, and into pretty much any other
country, came to escape poverty, disease,
and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name
like Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a
native american and are yourself an offshoot
of an immigrant population that was not
entirely welcomed with open arms into this
country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family came
here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I am third generation - not exactly the 1630
era.

Got you beat by several hundred years there.
Stop thinking that newer
immigrants are inferior to you.

IMMIGRANTS are fine. ILLEGAL immigrants are NOT.

In the end, it is all the same.

[Paul E. Lehmann]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing
poverty, ignorance, disease and in the
case of our south of the border
"immigrants" those who are less likely to
assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials
to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The
finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into
the US, and into pretty much any other
country, came to escape poverty, disease,
and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name
like Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a
native american and are yourself an
offshoot of an immigrant population that
was not entirely welcomed with open arms
into this country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family
came here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I am third generation - not exactly the 1630
era.

Got you beat by several hundred years there.
Stop thinking that newer
immigrants are inferior to you.

IMMIGRANTS are fine. ILLEGAL immigrants are
NOT.

In the end, it is all the same.

No, it is not. Allowing ILLEGALS predominately
from one part of the world subtracts from the
total legal immigrants allowed. Immigrants from
a variety of cultures provides for diversity.
Illegal immigration from just one culture DOES
NOT. We are moving from a "Melting Pot" concept
to a TAKEOVER concept.

[george conklin]

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing
poverty, ignorance, disease and in the
case of our south of the border
"immigrants" those who are less likely to
assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials
to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The
finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into
the US, and into pretty much any other
country, came to escape poverty, disease,
and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name
like Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a
native american and are yourself an
offshoot of an immigrant population that
was not entirely welcomed with open arms
into this country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family
came here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I am third generation - not exactly the 1630
era.

Got you beat by several hundred years there.
Stop thinking that newer
immigrants are inferior to you.

IMMIGRANTS are fine. ILLEGAL immigrants are
NOT.

In the end, it is all the same.

No, it is not.

Do you think the Native Americans were happy to be pushed out by European
immigrants? In the end, it is all the same.

[The Trucker]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing
poverty, ignorance, disease and in the
case of our south of the border
"immigrants" those who are less likely to
assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials
to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The
finished product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into
the US, and into pretty much any other
country, came to escape poverty, disease,
and obtain education and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name
like Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a
native american and are yourself an
offshoot of an immigrant population that
was not entirely welcomed with open arms
into this country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family
came here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I am third generation - not exactly the 1630
era.

Got you beat by several hundred years there.
Stop thinking that newer
immigrants are inferior to you.

IMMIGRANTS are fine. ILLEGAL immigrants are
NOT.

In the end, it is all the same.

No, it is not.

Do you think the Native Americans were happy to be pushed out by European
immigrants? In the end, it is all the same.

It isn't all the same to me. I am descended from Native Americans and it
is irrelevant. Unlike the Native Americans I do not have to put up with
it. What matters _IS_ what _WE_ want. Not what some rent seeking land
owning aristocratic minority might want.

[Dersu Uzala]

In article <C-OdnX9C7d5-***@earthlink.com>, ***@nospam.com
says...

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

On Jul 10, 8:50 am, "Paul E. Lehmann"

Post by Paul E. Lehmann
At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

Any machine or system needs raw materials to
work with. The raw
materials are often, well, raw. The finished
product depends on the
system/process as least as much as the raw
materials. Every group of immigrants into the
US, and into pretty much any other country, came
to escape poverty, disease, and obtain education
and a better
lifestyle for their families. With a name like
Lehmann I'd assume that you are not a native
american and are yourself an offshoot of an
immigrant population that was not entirely
welcomed with open arms into this country.

My family came here LEGALLY. That is a BIG
difference.

Really? Are you sure? When my family came here there were no visas or
anything like that...back in 1630 or so.

I think the original poster would know if he is a descendant of the Pigrims
better than you.

[george conklin]

Post by george conklin

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into
thinking everything is owed to them.
Cheap food transport made them think
they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution
was more about oil than chlorophyll, and
it caused economic bloat that now can't
be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where
oil goes in and people come out. Very
close to the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will
force a global shift toward frugality,
causing a drop in birthrates among all
classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance
which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that
the TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it
takes 2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't
think that Europeans take their religion as
seriously as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and
psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html

Irrelevant post.

Hardly Irrelevant. The thread is dealing with
oil
and population growth. Read it and weep.

There is NO correlation between oil and
population growth, except to the point that
underdeveloped countries have a higher rate of
population growth than developed nations.
As for the population growth issues, see the

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&submit=Submit+Query

Post by george conklin
This link is for the USA.
To see how populations SHRINK, look at the link

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&submit=Submit+Query

Post by george conklin
What immigrants are doing is filling in the
shrinkage which would have happened if we were
not importing our babies, just like we are
importing our
TVs, Radios and computers. We don't produce
either.

At the same time we are importing poverty,
ignorance, disease and in the case of our south
of the border "immigrants" those who are less
likely to assimilate.

This is flat-out racism. Migrants all over the world are positively
selected from the population from which they come. In short, they are
superior. Just now I am wating a crew of Mexican tree workers sit out the
rain in the farm opposite my house. They are essential to keep the economy
going. The nice WASP owners of the land, which they have held forever, work
over 300 days a year themselves in all kinds of weather. But the family is
not enough: the NEED extra help, for which they pay $9 an hour. Those
"imported" workers work hard and from sunup to sunset. They run up these 30
degree slopes with heavy loads on their backs (for spraying) and today they
are trimming. No local help has such skills and will work that hard. As
one old farmer told me several years ago, "I can't really talk to them but
they are working their balls off for me." And he was right there working
along with them.

[Pat]

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by george conklin

Post by Paul E. Lehmann

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential
population/economic growth over the past
century. It has fooled many into thinking
everything is owed to them. Cheap food
transport made them think they could
ignore local carrying-capacity. The Green
Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat
that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil
goes in and people come out. Very close to
the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will
force a global shift toward frugality,
causing a drop in birthrates among all
classes?

High birth rates are caused by ignorance
which can
also be spelled "RELIGION". The Pope

Yes, the Pope is so powerful that that
the TFRs of Italy and Spain are at
1.1, some of the lowest in the world (it
takes 2.2 to no-growth).

Europe is probably the exception. I don't
think that Europeans take their religion as
seriously as other parts of the world.

No, Europe is the average. Religion (and
psychology) do NOT predict
fertility and never have either.

http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html

Irrelevant post.

Hardly Irrelevant. The thread is dealing with oil
and population growth. Read it and weep.

There is NO correlation between oil and population growth, except to the
point that underdeveloped countries have a higher rate of population growth
than developed nations.

If there is rapidly escalating oil prices -- more so than now -- I
think you'd find a correlation between that and population growth; but
for the worst of reasons. Most pesticides are petroleum based. If
mid-to-poor populations could not control pests properly, you could
have widespread malaria outbreaks an such -- albeit on a localized
scale, not like some pan-epidemic.

Right now you're seeing some effect with food prices. Pesticides and
herbicides are going up in price because of the Olympics. China is
trying to clean the air so they are shutting down chemical factories.
Pesticides and herbicides are going through the roof because of it.

Post by george conklin
As for the population growth issues, see the following link to the US
http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&su...
This link is for the USA.
http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250&su...
What immigrants are doing is filling in the shrinkage which would have
happened if we were not importing our babies, just like we are importing our
TVs, Radios and computers. We don't produce either.

[John M.]

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential population/economic growth over the
past century. It has fooled many into thinking everything is owed to
them. Cheap food transport made them think they could ignore local
carrying-capacity. The Green Revolution was more about oil than
chlorophyll, and it caused economic bloat that now can't be sustained.
I once read a black-box analogy where oil goes in and people come out.
Very close to the truth.
Could it be that high oil prices will force a global shift toward
frugality, causing a drop in birthrates among all classes?

Ecological received wisdom, based on many empirical studies of
organisms across the board, show that death rates increase faster than
birth rates slow. Any difference here (peak oil) may hinge on the
human attribute of intellect.

Post by Enough Already
Contraception is really the ultimate form of conservation. We don't
need more mindless consumers in this world. Most people only conserve
when money forces them out of their self-entitlement delusion.* They
are already slowing down on the road to save fuel.
Rising costs could force people to finally respect limits. They've
been ignoring the ecological need for it.
Of course that doesn't sit well with "conservatives" who think living
with less equates to personal failure. They see talk of conservation
as a liberal control conspiracy. Don't try to show them evidence of
finitude. It's all about take, take, take and trying to upstage other
shallow people. With so much greed-indoctrination from culture and
media, someone should invent a way to make frugality seem selfish.

Frugality may be about to become mandatory.

[Jack May]

Post by John M.
Frugality may be about to become mandatory.

Innovation in alternative fuels is becoming rampant, not frugality. That is
the way the real world solves major problems.

[Peter Franks]

Post by Jack May

Post by John M.
Frugality may be about to become mandatory.

Innovation in alternative fuels is becoming rampant, not frugality. That is
the way the real world solves major problems.

Are you sure about that?

It seems to me that all innovation comes from the very much enlightened
totalitarian states throughout history.

I guess you haven't heard about all of the technological breakthroughs
coming out of North Korea. I really think that mandated frugality IS
the answer...

[george conklin]

Post by Jack May

Post by John M.
Frugality may be about to become mandatory.

Innovation in alternative fuels is becoming rampant, not frugality. That
is the way the real world solves major problems.

When you say "frugality is about to become mandatory," what you are saying
is, "I support rationing."

[Dan in Philly]

"Enough Already" wrote in message ...

Post by Enough Already
Cheap oil has enabled exponential population/economic growth over the
past century.

So: petroleum is being used as a lubricant?
Always wondered what KY jelly was made from.

Dan in Philly